Site Search Navigation

Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

Mayor Bloomberg’s Political Blindness

By David Firestone June 13, 2013 9:43 amJune 13, 2013 9:43 am

Mario Tama/Getty ImagesMayor Michael Bloomberg on June 11, 2013.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg has tried to brand himself as a figure “above politics,” and he’s been right that supporting better background checks for gun buyers should have nothing to do with being a Democrat or a Republican. But sometimes his dogmatic insistence on transcending the fray blinds him to political realities well known by more earthbound mortals.

He may not want to acknowledge it, but there really is a significant difference between the Democratic and Republican parties on guns. Mr. Bloomberg’s decision to punish the four Democratic senators who voted against expanded background checks in April could have the unintended effect of setting back the larger effort to reduce gun violence.

The Times reported on Wednesday that the mayor is urging Democratic donors in New York to cut off their contributions to the four senators: Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Max Baucus of Montana, Mark Begich of Alaska and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota. Collectively, the four have raised $2.2 million in New York.
“I want to tell people what these four stand for,” Mr. Bloomberg told The Times. “And then people can make up their own minds.”

These four come from bright-red states with a tradition of gun ownership very different from that of the Upper East Side. Mr. Pryor and Mr. Begich, who are up for election next year, will be lucky to hold on to their seats even with big New York money. Imperiling them will only enhance the Republicans’ chances of taking control of the Senate, and if that happens, Mitch McConnell will be running things, and Chuck Grassley will take over the Judiciary Committee.

A Republican Senate would push gun legislation backwards, passing bills that would force every state to honor another’s permit to carry concealed weapons. That’s actually in the 2012 Republican Party platform, and so is this line, which Mr. Bloomberg might want to consider carefully: “We oppose legislation that is intended to restrict our Second Amendment rights by limiting the capacity of clips or magazines or otherwise restoring the ill-considered Clinton gun ban.”

(The mayor might also want to think about what a Republican takeover would mean for federal spending on areas that he and representatives of other cities care about deeply, including education, mass transportation and Medicaid.)

Mr. Bloomberg seems to believe that many people in largely Republican states agree with him on background checks and would support a candidate of either party who does, too. But it’s highly unlikely such a candidate would make it on to the ballot, or would have a chance if he did. Anyone who tried would be viciously opposed by the National Rifle Association, and neither the mayor nor his money could adequately counter the group’s lies that background checks lead to a gun registry, which in turn leads to President Obama personally grabbing rifles from their hands.

Those four Democrats will probably remain disappointments on gun legislation and many other measures, and if nothing passes this term and gun violence continues unabated, they should be required to explain themselves to hundreds of grieving relatives. But their presence in the Senate makes other things possible, and holds back a tide that would be far worse.